This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Next Shoe Just Dropped: Court Denies Attorney-Client Privilege
Submitted by Simon Black via Sovereign Man blog,
In the Land of the Free, people grow up hearing a lot of things about their freedom.
You're told that you live in the freest country on the planet. You're told that other nations 'hate you' for your freedom.
And you're told that you have the most open and fair justice system in the world.
This justice system is supposedly founded on bedrock principles-- things like a defendant being presumed innocent until proven guilty. The right to due process and an impartial hearing. The right to counsel and attorney-client privilege.
Yet each of these core pillars has been systematically dismantled over the years:
1. So that it can operate with impunity outside of the law, the federal government has set up its own secret FISA courts to rubber stamp NSA surveillance.
According to data obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, of the nearly 34,000 surveillance requests made to FISA courts in the last 35-years, only ELEVEN have been rejected.
Unsurprising given that FISA courts only hear the case from the government's perspective. It is literally a one-sided argument in FISA courts. Hardly an impartial hearing, no?
2. The concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' may officially exist in courts, but administratively it was thrown out long ago.
These days there are hundreds of local, state, and federal agencies that can confiscate your assets, levy your bank account, and freeze you out of your life's savings. None of this requires a court order.
By the time a case goes to court, you have been deprived of the resources you need to defend yourself. You might technically be presumed innocent, but you have been treated and punished like a criminal from day one.
3. Attorney-Client privilege is a long-standing legal concept which ensures that communication between an attorney and his/her client is completely private.
In Upjohn vs. the United States, the Supreme Court itself upheld attorney-client privilege as necessary "to encourage full and frank communication between attorneys and their clients and thereby promote broader public interests in the observance of law. . ."
It doesn't matter what you're accused of-- theft. treason. triple homicide. With very limited exceptions, an attorney cannot be compelled to testify against a client, nor can their communications be subpoenaed for evidence.
Yet in a United States Tax Court decision announced on Wednesday, the court dismissed attorney client privilege, stating that:
"When a person puts into issue his subjective intent in deciding how to comply with the law, he may forfeit the privilege afforded attorney-client communications."
In other words, if a person works with legal counsel within the confines of the tax code to legitimately minimize the amount of taxes owed, that communication is no longer protected by attorney-client privilege.
Furthermore, the ruling states that if the individuals do not submit attorney-client documentation as required, then the court would prohibit them from introducing any evidence to demonstrate their innocence.
Unbelievable.
While it's true that attorney-client privilege has long been assailed in numerous court cases (especially with regards to tax matters), this decision sets the most dangerous precedent yet.
With this ruling, government now has carte blanche to set aside long-standing legal protections and even deny a human being even the chance to defend himself.
Naturally, you won't hear a word about this in the mainstream media.
But it certainly begs the question, what's the point of even having a trial? Or a constitution?
When every right and protection you have can be disregarded in their sole discretion, one really has to wonder how anyone can call it a 'free country' any more.
»
- 81280 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Never quit/ never givup
If a tree in a forest fell on a politician and no one was around, would it make a sound?
Google 'how many tax laws exist? No law firm can say. There are even more non tax laws, statutory laws, city, state, criminal, international, commercial, family, copyright, patent, maritime, contract law, then case law interpreting other laws. And remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Good, Holder, Jarret and the rest of these fuckers can be indicted. Just my positive thinking.
And let's haul lois lerners ass to jail until she agrees to tell all about abuse of power involving iR$, in-justice dept., eLijah cUmmings and the whole nest of rats.
Come onnnnn WBanzi7!
Got yer vid already lined up!
Actually, here's the next shoe to drop:
http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/blm-whistleblower-bundy-ranch-siege-ha...
Simply a well defined effort to distinguish between the beneficial to society role of a laywer and a participant in a fraud pretending to be a lawyer. Lawyers are accountable to society too.
I thought it was messed up here in the uk.
Here in the uk they scrapped free legal aid, which just alows big companies to sack you for no reason knowing that most can not afford to fight cases like this and other areas.
I really feel for americans your so called democracy is worse than ours :(
You can rob, rape, assault and kill with client attorney privilege intact. But if you mess with the tax man you have no rights.
Happy 420 day, Bitchez!!
The BS meter just pegged. This is just blowback for the 0.1 percenters who now put a lawyer in every room or every conversation so that they are always in attorney client privilege.
If I knew that DC was to be incinerated and could stop it...I Would Not.
Welcome to neo Amerika....
Wow, what a desceptive article. The case that brought this about favors the little guy. http://johnsonandbell.com/alerts-blog/insurance/law-update-court-finds-n...
President Obama, why don't you just take off the mask. You either do or don't support the Constitution of the United States of America. It is a document born of the enlightenment. You can demonstrate that you are a real person who was elected under the assumption that what you said and what you would do would be the same and true. How you do that is close Guantanamo and return our living Constitution to its purest form. Please reverse the police state rulings and wars on multiple fronts. It's time to earn that Nobel Prize.
And over taxes of all things. I suppose keeping the revenue flowing to the Feds is above the constitution now. I wonder if this can be appealed? Seems to me the court has a conflict of interest being the Feds pay their salaries.
Good thing this applies equally to Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and even the IRS discussions about legality & amounts of taxation with their own lawyers.
Oh wait, it does apply equally to all, right? Right?
9-1-1! Someone may have just died of a heart-attack while laughing, EMTs - stat!